X-Recipient:	archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com
DKIM-Filter:	OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 7DB313858C56
DKIM-Signature:	v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cygwin.com;
	s=default; t=1705671933;
	bh=jI0QdD+RIeW6ca/mHGx84ZWKfmpazYh5V3VUgDjD8xs=;
	h=Date:To:Subject:List-Id:List-Unsubscribe:List-Archive:List-Post:
	List-Help:List-Subscribe:From:Reply-To:From;
	b=k9TguzVZaDeTqztmtJda/L0HlUJoJv3bj5Y69LuIB9nZzeDVHR3teumYN+6XtuoVR
	L9ZZtGzgdcP4LSdPImucmNcLfuxwt0a037Rc/LGpBBKrl65Z/shXlfSGu1ApXjb4oI
	krgccMKMNdc4kRzmmjczr6kT5DflLE4t+2bHXLeg=
X-Original-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
DMARC-Filter:	OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org 4B9453858D28
ARC-Filter:	OpenARC Filter v1.0.0 sourceware.org 4B9453858D28
ARC-Seal:	i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=sourceware.org; s=key; t=1705671883; cv=none;
	b=VGTIJk4oSKAzG7NPVJJLoJUHuKJShH5aoyOpz/YlMvs93U4hzu6IPHOwWbdNyQHLW+i43f5iy2SCHvUxUZhqlb2CzaMV1gtSAJ3rJuLjCkKVsNEE062imEWgZaJ+cUiIXxqsXuScJUG7o8nsJoUQmFzw7GcynOh5iClmuCQnJZ0=
ARC-Message-Signature:	i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=sourceware.org; s=key;
	t=1705671883; c=relaxed/simple;
	bh=uveLwh4fU1UU4qmH7y2VwZfEQS7cSA/bpBbNUTpFPls=;
	h=Date:From:To:Subject:Message-Id:Mime-Version;
	b=ujJ0tf9/l4AR0wl4bdW3/3QxCUuPJAEQUDuuGv5nsrDTdCV9RRqrU534FXM9+troMdv2/yqVP13nEIVl+9dcF1syPI1834Uci7TsrTMYTnogjxzyp1mTLeO6cygRB+8Xusi1NeQcOj7t8aUMrgsUIhR/nMr93Ux/cVQV6lgV7xg=
ARC-Authentication-Results:	i=1; server2.sourceware.org
Date:	Fri, 19 Jan 2024 22:44:36 +0900
To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject:	Possiblly bug of cygwin1.dll
Message-Id:	<20240119224436.876a055f356f7c6796bc725b@nifty.ne.jp>
X-Mailer:	Sylpheed 3.7.0 (GTK+ 2.24.30; i686-pc-mingw32)
Mime-Version:	1.0
X-Spam-Status:	No, score=-3.4 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, KAM_DMARC_STATUS,
	RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE, SPF_HELO_PASS, SPF_PASS, TXREP,
	T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6
X-Spam-Checker-Version:	SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on
	server2.sourceware.org
X-BeenThere:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
X-Mailman-Version:	2.1.30
List-Id:	General Cygwin discussions and problem reports <cygwin.cygwin.com>
List-Archive:	<https://cygwin.com/pipermail/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-request AT cygwin DOT com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe:	<https://cygwin.com/mailman/listinfo/cygwin>,
	<mailto:cygwin-request AT cygwin DOT com?subject=subscribe>
From:	Takashi Yano via Cygwin <cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
Reply-To:	Takashi Yano <takashi DOT yano AT nifty DOT ne DOT jp>
Sender:	"Cygwin" <cygwin-bounces+archive-cygwin=delorie DOT com AT cygwin DOT com>

Hi,

I might find the bug of cygwin1.dll (including 3.4.x, 3.5.0 (TEST)).
The following test case (c++ code) causes handle leak.

This issue is reproducible with both g++ and clang++.
However, it does not happen in Linux environment.
So I guess this is the cygwin1.dlll bug.

I looked into this problem a bit, and found number of event handle
increases every loop.

I doubt pthread_mutex_xxx functions.

#include <future>
int func() { return 0; }
int main()
{
  for (;;) {
    std::future<int> f = std::async(std::launch::async, func);
    f.get();
  }
  return 0;
}

-- 
Takashi Yano <takashi DOT yano AT nifty DOT ne DOT jp>

-- 
Problem reports:      https://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ:                  https://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation:        https://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info:     https://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple

- Raw text -